photos removed
The group of red flowers was created with a Kodak Comerical View with <S>either a Kodak 12" comerical ektar or</S> a Wollensak 10". The Orchids were created with a Sinar F1, the closeup profile a Optar 135, the other Orchids a Symmar 150. All images E100SW (4 years out of date; kept @ 20⁰F) scaned on a Microtek 8700 Pro using Silverfast software @ 300dpi. Minor corrections in photoshop.
Charles.

_________________
Graflex Corp.was a <font color=white>(silent)</font> supporter of Rain Forest Devastation.



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: 45PSS on 2006-12-06 18:07 ]</font>

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: 45pss on 2007-02-17 18:43 ]</font>

Charles, this proves vintage lenses still deliver fine pics.

Quote:

On 2006-12-04 08:41, pv17vv wrote: Charles, this proves vintage lenses still deliver fine pics.

Did you ever doubt it?

Charles, What do you think of the Symmar?

Quote:

On 2006-12-05 14:44, camz wrote: Charles, What do you think of the Symmar?

PMFJI.

I shoot a 135/5.6 convertible Symmar on my 2x3 Graphics. I also shoot a 127/4.7 Tominon, ex-Polaroid CU-5. On 2x3 its a tossup, neither is much better than the other and one could be happy with either. I expect that the 135 Symmar would be better on 4x5 because of its greater coverage.

I also have a 210/5.6 Boyer Zircon with horrible ugly cleaning marks on the front element. In the same class as the convertible Symmar or perhaps the subsequent Symmar-S. On 2x3, cleaning marks notwithstanding, it shoots very well.

I don't think that, subject to having the coverage needed and being in not too bad shape, any lens in this class (Sironar, Symmar, Zircon) would be a bad mistake.

Cheers,

Dan

Quote:

On 2006-12-05 14:44, camz wrote: Charles, What do you think of the Symmar?

On a scale of 1 to 10 a 7.5 @ 150 and a 2 at the convertible length of 265. Compaired to my Congo 150 the Congo is a 8 up to 25 feet and a 6 after that while the Symmar starts at 7 for close stuff and improves at distances greater that 25 feet. I switched in the photos presented from the Optar to the Symmar solely to gain greater camera to subject distance while retaining the image size I wanted. The winter sun only makes it to my patio for 3 hours in the mid afternoon during the fall/winter months and the Optar would have required me to be so close as to get camera shadows on the subject.
There is a wildlife preserve on the SF Bay a few miles away with a 3 1/2 mile hiking trail where I have shot the Congo, Optar and Symmar on my Speed and the Optar and Symmar are tied for good (sharp) results.
Charles

_________________
Graflex Corp.was a <font color=white>(silent)</font> supporter of Rain Forest Devastation.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: 45PSS on 2006-12-05 18:32 ]</font>

Very nice Charles.
I especially like the profile shot with the Optar. They are also one of my personal favorite lenses. I ran a Symmar 135 on both my 4x5 and 2x3's for a brief period and the Optar won out hands down. Which surprized me because the Symmar I had was a Linhof, and the glass and shutter appeared flawless and in excellent condition (I eventually decided it was just a dog that slipped through the so called Linhof selection). But after comparing a lot of lenses, I find that German glass like the Xenar and Angulons tend to be a bit sharper than American Optics of the same period. Having looked through a bunch of 135 Optars, I am under the impression that this was one of the more consistent quality lenses from Wollensak. On the other hand, another widely distributed lens, the 101 series Optar (Raptar) can vary a lot in image quality from barely useable to excellent.
Anyway, thanks for posting the images, always nice to see what folks are up to...


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: troublemaker on 2006-12-06 13:46 ]</font>

Dan, no doubts about it, but it is always good to see it in the facts. It is so rare…